[liberationtech] WC3 and DRM

[Jonathan Wilkes]

On 07/16/2013 10:15 AM, Nick Daly wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Jonathan Wilkes<jancsika at yahoo.com> 
> wrote:
>> On 07/15/2013 11:45 PM, Catherine Roy wrote:
>>> As a member of the HTML working group and the Restricted Media 
>>> community
>>> group, my experience is that discussions within these groups 
>>> surrounding the
>>> EME draft have been extremely frustrating.  The same scenario as 
>>> with Jeff
>>> Jaffe's blog post has happened there. The whole thing has been 
>>> rather unreal
>>> and this recent post[1] from a Restricted Media mailing list member 
>>> sums up
>>> my feelings about how futile the whole exercice has been.
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-restrictedmedia/2013Jul/0190.html 
>>>
>> It seems like there are two fronts-- one, which you address by 
>> jettisoning
>> EME in freedomhtml, and another which is to keep member organizations 
>> from
>> standardizing software/hardware on EME.  Is there any way for the 
>> current
>> members of all the working groups to put pressure on the WC3?
> Is there any point to messaging the draft's editors directly?
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/encrypted-media/
>
> If you delivered a thousand copies of the Hollyweb petition a day, you
> could do it for nearly a month before running out of individual
> signers [2].  That'd be nearly 75k letters between all 3 drafters.

Well...
The three draft editors aren't elected officials; one of them works for
the W3C member organization that would probably reap the most benefits
from hooks for DRM standardized across the web.  I doubt any
amount of emails to an employee of that company is going to convince
the company to stop developing the cheapest way for them to sustain
their current business model.

What do the working group members from all current (and past) working 
groups
have to say about the EME draft?  Has there been an effort to get all of 
their
input on whether EME should be part of the web, or a poll of whether 
they support
it or not?

While I'm happy to see so many people signed the FSF petition, a 
statement of
objection specifically from a large portion of working group members 
would be more
powerful. They are the ones doing the work of actually making and 
testing the standards,
and their numbers include outside experts who may not be affiliated with 
a member
organization and could more easily speak out.  The W3C 
staff/administration is miniscule
by comparison, and depends on those folks to do the work so I doubt they 
want
to risk alienating them.

-Jonathan

> 2:http://www.defectivebydesign.org/oscar-awarded-w3c-in-the-hollyweb
> -- 
> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by 
> emailing moderator atcompanys at stanford.edu or changing your settings 
> athttps://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/attachments/20130722/af5421d7/attachment.html>